Navybone

Does Bobby do anything with the troop - does he go on campouts, backpacking, etc? Is he disruptive when others work on advancement? We have a scout who is also not interested in advancement, but loves to go camping. We make him go through the actions (advancement) steps to appreciate in camps - Fireman chit, Tot'n chit, stove and cooking safety, setting up a tent, first aid, etc. Does not bring his book, does not participate in everything, but has to in those safety and overall camping safety items. He will not cook with others, only himself, but he has to follow all the same rules. We encourage him to advance since he is doing most of the work, but just wants to learn how to camp.

My two cents is that email, websites, or any method where the only medium is the written word, is not a great form of communication. Because so much of effective communication is non-verbal, it can be very difficult to understand any nuance. An example is that sarcasm is rarely effective in email or a site like this. What is the mood of the reader, what else is going on, what did they just read - all can impact how written communications is ready. In the example here, I totally agree that is could be received as unprofessional. But was it meant that way. btw, this is always a fun topic of conversation in the Communication MB.

Not quite sure how to take your comment. What do you mean taught properly?

Our troop has a few Scouts who will soon be turning 18. For various reasons, they have not progressed toward earning Eagle Scout, but have remained very active in the troop. They continue to be very active members of the troop, participating in camping, are excellent in working with younger scouts, giving them the benefit of what they have learned, etc. They are great Scouts, they represent the troop and BSA very well, and would have made excellent examples of what an Eagle Scout is and what they represent. To me, it would be a shame to simply have these Scouts disappear when they turn 18 without some level of recognition. They could have given up when earning Eagle was no longer an option, but they have not. They have held leadership positions (positions of responsibility) , they uphold the Scout Law and Oath, and they are respected by the adults and scouts in the troop. I am wondering if other troops have a way they recognize and publicly thank similar scouts in their troops when these Scouts reach the end of their time as Boy Scouts. And if there is already a thread on this, please let me know – I tried a number of search options with no luck.

That is an insane jump. How are they selling the monthly adventure fee - does it guarantee anything specific or a service?

Your thought is to get rid of Tiger and Lion?

Maybe more than a bit off topic?

I would think that the parents could argue that the Council, who owns the camp, did not provide sufficient oversight and control of their range if they allowed this to occur. At a minimum, call the council's overall management and the approval for use process into intense scrutiny.

Thanks for sharing this info. Very interesting approach to citizenship. You say it is mandatory to complete this award to process in UK Scouts?

So do we do the same with Personal Fitness? Kids have to take PE in school. How about swimming - kids have to know how to swim in our school district. If a scout takes a class like environmental science in school, should they go ahead and automatically earn merit badges that cover the same topic, Eagle required or not? There is no national standard for education. Scout provides a leveling for those who participate, giving them a significant jump on being successful adults. I would argue that the eagle-required MBs are inline with the mission of Boy Scouts and its identified methods.

I would not say that schools cover everything in the citizenship merit badges.

So, CIS, which focuses on developing an understanding of the people in the community, is less useful than learning how the community works for a common good? Are the concepts of understanding diversity, equity, and inclusion not all part of how to strengthen a community, or even a nation? How to include your ethics in decison making -Not useful? The four citizenship merit badges are all about the developing of our youth to be successful in their endeavors, to be leaders of this nation and the world.

Unless the scout has put themselves in a time crunch, electing to work on an elective MB is their decision. CIS is not different than many other eagle required badges - there are some that are fun and interesting, and some that can be perceived as more school work. It is a not a zero-sum argument, unless the scout is only going to work on the minimum requirement. I can honestly say I have never seen a scout jump up to complete Personal Management or Family Life. But they are an opportunity to learn fantastic life long skills that most scouts do not realize they will benefit from.

The author is all over the place and seems to be looking for reasons to take his son out of scouting. His expectations are unrealistic during an ongoing police investigation. The only part that I do agree with in his article is that this is the right opportunity for BSA to look at its shooting programs with a discerning eye to see where it can be improved. I strongly believe that shooting has a role in scouting, but BSA needs to make sure that its rule, roles, and responsibilities are focused on if there are changes needed to teach gun safety to today's youth. Not only the mechanics of using a firearm, but the right mindset and culture.

Intentional or not has nothing to do with if the incident was the result of negligence. Negligence occurs when someone fails to do something, like make sure a loaded semi-automatic weapon is not able to be put in a boys hand. To put in military terms, dereliction of duty. The young boy pulling the trigger is an accident, but the steps leading to that weapon in that boys hand in that condition is not an accident. It is failure at several point by responsible adults.

I disagree - if we accept that the RSO cannot provide for range safety and range management, then Boy Scouts has no business running a shooting range. Obviously we do not have all the answer, but the idea or concept that running a safe range is hard and good enough is fine (my summary of your comments) is flat our wrong. If the range cannot be run safely, it should be run. Full stop.

I do not see how this is any better. To call this accidental is to ignore that this was, with what is available now, the result of poor, very poor leadership and management. There were deliberate steps that got the weapon and the ammunition into a space where this could happen. Intentional or not does not negate that this entire affair is the result of negligence.

"Carvalho was shot when another boy, who police said was unsupervised, picked up a loaded AK-47 semi automatic rifle at the range. When the boy set the gun back down, it went off and the bullet struck Carvalho in the head." A loaded AK-47 type weapon was left where it could be used in an unsafe manner. The result was the death of an individual. That is not an accidental discharge. Negligence occurred when that weapon, in that condition, was able to be handled but someone who used it in an unsafe manner which resulted in someone being shot. If the proper controls had been maintained on the rifle, there would not have been any issue. The NRAs own safety rules are not followed, rules which you can positively say are written in blood. And yes, crashing your car can be negligence, like if you are trying to text while driving and hit another car.

Since the requirement states that a parent's permission is required and that permission is not given, seems that the scout has met the requirement. BSA gave the scout an out with the parent's permission required statement. Seems reasonable that if 1) the MB is eagle required, and 2) there is this caveat, then 3) the absence of said permission does not negate the entire MB, just that specific requirement. Having said that, and adult bias aside, I think the MB is very effective in prompting good discussions on some serious issues.

First - Question 9 9. How likely are you to recommend financially supporting the Boy Scouts of America to others? * Second, when I tried to submit, it took me to : https://donations.scouting.org/ And Third and finally, when asked, I said I live in California, and the message I received was: "Whoops! At this time, we are encouraging donors from the following states to give to their local councils. California, District Of Columbia, Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Tennessee, Virgin Islands, Washington, Wisconsin." I took that as it is trying to raise money and not me just having some negative bias from the get-go.

Yep - just went through it. very disheartening that their focus is on making money.

That is quite a jump when you say allowing someone not to wear the official uniform pants means that YPT or smoking rules are optional also. One is for the safety of the youth and one is the present a unformed appearance for BSA scouts but actually little bearing on the ability to safely meet the mission of scouting. This is not the military. Lets not pretend it is and approach it the same way.

But Curious Scouter and Qwase just stated the standard, and the standard is that while desired and should be encouraged, uniforms are not mandatory. What is the goal here for youth in scouts? Is it about the uniform, or is that one of the tools and techniques to develop and identify scouts? The mission is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.

True, but you have to honest with what Parts. The neckerchief, the khaki or green quasi-military shirt (or Blue for cubs), the merit badge sash are all emblematic of Boy scouts. I would argue the rest is optional.

Replace every 6 months is $120. And that replacement rate is not hyperbole.